LSAT 104 | Section 2 | Reading Comprehension: Q14

RC Question 14 Explanation

DISCUSSION: This was the first hypothesis from the second paragraph.

The lawyers spends the rest of the passage arguing against the idea that lawyers behaved themselves.

In paragraph three, the author shows that English civil lawyer associations did prosecute lapses. Since the two bars shared members, it’s likely that canon lawyers also behaved badly.

Then the author presents evidence that the church complained about their conduct, and that the lawyers apparently conspired to cover up their faults (lines 55-56).

In short, the author thinks the hypothesis is likely incorrect. He doesn’t say it’s certainly wrong. His evidence is only probable.

___________

1. I thought this was correct at first. But look at the final paragraph. “Apparently” (line 56), “may actually” (lines 58-59), “may also” (line 61).
    
   The author’s conclusion is tentative, and not certain. His only evidence is circumstantial (paragraph 3), or based on documents of complaints. Complaints can be unfounded.
2. The author only mentions modern society once, and in passing, on lines 9-10. The author never mentions modern society again, and never makes this argument.
3. CORRECT. The civil courts in England heard many complaints (paragraph 3, lines 33-35). This is one of the reasons the author thinks the hypothesis is unlikely.
4. “Dearth” means absence. We know that there were often many documents (lines 51-54), and it’s usually easier to analyze a situation when there are many documents.
    
   Also, the author spends the entire passage trying to analyze this hypothesis. So this answer choice has no support.
5. The ecclesiastical documents (lines 51-54) show that many people complained against lawyers behavior. This shows evidence that the lawyers might have deserved discipline.